Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT

Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I think we're hoping that somebody will step up and investigate how
>> narwhal's problem might be fixed. However, the machine's owner (Dave)
>> doesn't appear to have the time/interest to do that.

> It's a time issue right now I'm afraid (always interested in fixing bugs).

> However, if "fixing" it comes down to upgrading the seriously old
> compiler and toolchain on that box (which frankly is so obsolete, I
> can't see why anyone would want to use anything like it these days),
> then I think the best option is to retire it, and replace it with
> Windows 2012R2 and a modern release of MinGW/Msys which is far more
> likely to be similar to what someone would want to use at present.

No argument here. I would kind of like to have more than zero
understanding of *why* it's failing, just in case there's more to it
than "oh, probably a bug in this old toolchain". But finding that out
might well take significant time, and in the end not tell us anything
very useful.

> Does anyone really think there's a good reason to keep maintaining
> such an obsolete animal?

Is it likely that anyone is still using Windows 2003 in the field?
A possible compromise is to update the toolchain but stay on the
same OS release, so that we still have testing that's relevant to
people using older OS releases.

regards, tom lane